BaaLocks

I'd put the whole of government, every party, every MP in there. I wouldn't watch it, but I would be delighted with the peace it would bring for a couple of weeks.

Why are Nottingham murders so hard to solve?
There's no dental records and all the DNA matches

You're not allowed to give out sweets any more, it has to be air dried papaya rolled in pumpkin seeds or small packets of goji berries infused with Amazonian rainwater

We shouldn't worry too much about WhatsApp, we have enough MPs sharing government secrets on there for it to remain popular.
Signal is useful because it can manage both texts and your WhatsApp IM equivalents. Telegram also. Facebook enjoyed a bit of a resurgence with it's market place because, sadly, once you've realised that half your contacts you never intend to see again, quarter you see already and a quarter you don't want knowing your business then it no longer serves a purpose. Plus, for most it's just modern day curtain twitching - you just want to know what everyone else is up to but if nobody actually says what they are doing it's all a bit of a waste of time (tbf - I probably prefer that to all those who used to photo their morning coffee every day or post an image of a cloud they saw on the way to work that looks like Ed Sheeran).
TBF - it's what l like about this place, I'm never going to meet one single person on this forum, and I think we're all happy about that particular point.

We shouldn't worry too much about WhatsApp, we have enough MPs sharing government secrets on there for it to remain popular.
Signal is useful because it can manage both texts and your WhatsApp IM equivalents. Telegram also. Facebook enjoyed a bit of a resurgence with it's market place because, sadly, once you've realised that half your contacts you never intend to see again, quarter you see already and a quarter you don't want knowing your business then it no longer serves a purpose. Plus, for most it's just modern day curtain twitching - you just want to know what everyone else is up to but if nobody actually says what they are doing it's all a bit of a waste of time (tbf - I probably prefer that to all those who used to photo their morning coffee every day or post an image of a cloud they saw on the way to work that looks like Ed Sheeran).
TBF - it's what l like about this place, I'm never going to meet one single person on this forum, and I think we're all happy about that particular point.

Oh, I thought he was letting us know these were coming back.
Used to love the little beggars.....

I hace ‘friends’ on Facebook that I have to actively restrain myself from liking or commenting on their posts, lest they might realise I’m still alive. 
not that I’m actively trying to avoid them, but it’s just really random when the first communication you have with someone after 7 years is to thumbs up a cat meme. 

We shouldn't worry too much about WhatsApp, we have enough MPs sharing government secrets on there for it to remain popular.
Signal is useful because it can manage both texts and your WhatsApp IM equivalents. Telegram also. Facebook enjoyed a bit of a resurgence with it's market place because, sadly, once you've realised that half your contacts you never intend to see again, quarter you see already and a quarter you don't want knowing your business then it no longer serves a purpose. Plus, for most it's just modern day curtain twitching - you just want to know what everyone else is up to but if nobody actually says what they are doing it's all a bit of a waste of time (tbf - I probably prefer that to all those who used to photo their morning coffee every day or post an image of a cloud they saw on the way to work that looks like Ed Sheeran).
TBF - it's what l like about this place, I'm never going to meet one single person on this forum, and I think we're all happy about that particular point.

You're not allowed to give out sweets any more, it has to be air dried papaya rolled in pumpkin seeds or small packets of goji berries infused with Amazonian rainwater

You're not allowed to give out sweets any more, it has to be air dried papaya rolled in pumpkin seeds or small packets of goji berries infused with Amazonian rainwater

Exactly!

Exactly!

You're not allowed to give out sweets any more, it has to be air dried papaya rolled in pumpkin seeds or small packets of goji berries infused with Amazonian rainwater

You're not allowed to give out sweets any more, it has to be air dried papaya rolled in pumpkin seeds or small packets of goji berries infused with Amazonian rainwater

While I agree with much of what you have said above the pure fact is that we allowed more Ukranians into the UK in six months than we did all refugees in five years prior. That is a fact - it is very easy to argue.
Your point that we have inherited a bit of a time bomb, with many likely to be homeless, is correct. However, I'm not sure many living in Aleppo under ISIS would have agreed with you that the nature of the war in Ukraine warranted preferential treatment. I think you're right on the preference, it's racist (and politically opportunist) at a governmental level - we didn't want to let those in from the Middle East because we were terrified they were all terrorists, it served certain people well (Boris) to be seen to be supporting Ukraine. Hence the stats on News at Ten last night stating the significant decrease in population who are primarily worried about immigration.
Not sure what this has got to do with Extinction Rebellion any more - I tried to make an associated point to begin with but I do appreciate I have taken the thread a little off tangent. Apologies for that, I shall now give way...

You really have been reading too many copies of the Daily Mail - of course we are not just going to open up the borders and let in anyone who can make the passage. We assess and allow entry based on various criteria - either they are sufficiently at threat to warrant asylum or they make the points system criteria and come for economic reasons.
As others have said, when it's those ones with the same colour skin as us from Ukraine we seem to be able to put in place all sorts of programmes that will hopefully help them rebuild their lives and also boost our ecomony once they enter the workplace.
In six months we have offered more visas and assistance than we did in the entire period of 2016-2021. We're off thread here but still, what is it that allows us to willingly resettle 115,000 Ukranians when for five years prior a number of 20k was enough to have many in the country screaming that we were full to bursting. We are not, we were not, and the last six months has proved that - conclusively.

Now, today: we take in as many as have a valid reason to be here (risk of persecution, asylum). I don't think we need to cap that, we can live with the likely numbers. For all others, from whatever country or background, we set up a fair and reasonable points based system (or - bit of controversy - re-enter the EU and work with them on fair policy). It's probably a bit off track given the thread but still.
The future: Well, I guess the point is whether we want to work to limit the impact of climate change and leave many parts of the world able to support populations, or continue to work on a model of short term greed and leave our descendants to live with the consequence. If we can do that properly then - in the most basic form - people can remain where they live because they can. If we don't then quotas and application processes will be anything but the thing to be worrying about.

I doubt either of us will be here when this all comes to pass - it's 50-100 years down the road. Which is why very few want to care much about it here and now - and I do get that point.
The colour point is pretty darned evident - forgive me if I missed them but I don't remember too many Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq or Yemen flags flying in sympathy when their particular conflicts were/are in full flow. As I've said on the other thread, I'm not going there any more on that one.
But if you genuinely believe that the whole population between the tropics is going to sit there and just say "oh well, our crops have failed, we have no water, we've got nothing to live on. I guess that's all our fault then" then I would say that is equally laughable hysterics (no need for an apostrophe). And when they do come, we're going to be need something more than a couple of ladies behind a desk at St Pancras asking if they've got anywhere to sleep.
And, to answer your initial point, that is an immigration crisis. What we have here and now are a few fellow human beings who need help - not being treated like under classling criminals for no other reason than they happened to be born somewhere a little less fortunate than you or me. That, by any definition, is not a crisis.

I think the two are likely more linked than we would like to imagine. At the moment we have around 30,000 people crossing the channel every year in boats. They mainly do this because we have been effective at cutting off other routes (under trains, in the back of lorries etc). 30,000 is a drop in the ocean (and one that a country of 65m people could accomodate without even feeling the draft). And, if I may say, it is one we are willing to accept having allowed more than 100k of Ukranian refugees (OK - those ones weren't brown, I'll give you that, so maybe a little easier for us to accept as potentially living here).
But the broader question is not how many but more why - nobody pays a criminal thousands of pounds to cross a cold, dark sea in a dinghy unless they are really desperate. And while many might be coming here now because of fleeing civil wars and conflicts (many that have climate at their heart - Somalia being a very good example) you can be sure that when the crops start failing in a few years it won't be a few in a dinghy that will not be wanting to get here but having to get here. We are fortunate, we live in a part of the world that can likely tolerate some degree of climate impact - it will change things but we can still survive. For millions - maybe billions - that won't be the case and so they will have no choice, as humans have done for millenia before them, but to flee to where the food is. 
So the two are linked, and we'd better start planning for it - one way or the other.

TalkTV (OK, I get it, hardly the levelest of playing fields) just asked Twitter what Rishi's first area of focus should be as PM. This is what they said - the fictional immigrant crisis still getting twenty times the votes against the environment.

In other news, this village in Wales is being decommissioned as the battle to save it against rising sea levels has been conceded as impossible to maintain. I am minded to believe that, even here, there was at least one person who still thought immigration was a bigger problem.
Just how else are people going to get the attention needed to do something about this? Really, if throwing soup at pictures is not the answer they how - just how - can they get their point across? Greta tries it and she's a whining child, Charlie v3 does it and he's an old nincompoop.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220506-the-uk-climate-refugees-who-wont-leave

Just amazing to hear Julia Hartley Brewer in full fast lane climate change denier mode on Question Time last night. Look, I get the point that weather is not climate and one hot summer is not the end of days but, really, to be so utterly dumb as to suggest it just isn't happening is, well, good for the clicks I guess.

Maybe she can give Mother Earth some free antibiotics - that should solve the problem...